Young muslims dream of killing infidels...

Monday, June 28, 2004

We are often told by "moderate" muslims that the terrorists who have hijacked their religion are a small minority.(hat tip LGF)Over at gawaher.com, the Islamic forum where English-speaking Muslims talk openly of jihad and holy warriors, we find a charming discussion of their love for Osama bin Laden: Bin Laden Is Not a Terrorist!!!

"Osama is the best!^_^!

Osama did 9/11 but the muslims who died there shound have NOT! been there! the americans killed more than 1 million Iraqi child with the chemicals THEY! threw! on Iraq and kill more than 2 million in afghanistan! And dont forget about Chechnya! that they left! and non muslims! NO ONE! told them they are wrong when they killed 2 million in Hiroshima and Nagasaki! so they deserve it!

What are they doing for muslims in the Philipines, Thailand, Palestine, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Bosnia, Albania, Iraq and i can go on and on they are ONLY! HELPING! the goverment on killing the muslims! the USA goverment should be removed! and the American people should be removed same thing goes for Australia and the UK!

You call him a terrorist i call him Al-Sheikh Al-Muhajed!

and our goverments! won’t do a thing! they are Allies! to the Shaitan! Satan,the Devil! they must be removed too in this Era Islam is struggling to survive and Osamsa is our hero!

DONT! talk about the muslims who died in 9/11 talk about the muslims who died in Afghanistan! Palestine! isnt the USA a Terrorists!

Ma’a Salama!"

In another topic, they discuss whether they have the guts to go on Jihad.

"Salam, jihad doesnt have to be fighting only, you can stay home, makes lots of money and give it all to the mujahideen... Money is key factor in Jihad... whats more useful to the muslims should be considered :) .. maybe you couldbe more useful donating and making money for the mujahideen for Allahs sake, insted of goingwith an AK-47 and getting blon to bits (which is also good :):)).

...

I would definitely fight in Iraq! What they do to my brother and sisters! What these infidels do!!! I would definitely have pleasure in killing these Zaalims!! Allah has said to go Jihad!

I always make dua to die a martyr! Insha-Allah!

like i wouldn’t bomb or anything. But I would get a gun!
Especially in Palestine! Man!!!! I can’t wait till Imam Mahdi comes to get rids of the black hearted Jews!!!!

islam, religion of peace...

Teenage girl influenced by extremist Muslim group

Monday, June 21, 2004

There was quite an expression of outrage from muslims in the case of a Muslim schoolgirl in Britain whose desire to wear the jilbab was turned down by the High Court.

Apparently, this 15-year old orphan was influenced by the radical Islamic terror gang Hizb ut-Tahrir. My goodness, I'm absolutely shocked and stunned that head-choppers would be behind this court challenge and am equally surprised that moderate muslims would support them. Shocked and stunned I tell you...

THE teenage girl who fought a two-year legal battle to wear full Islamic dress to school was influenced by an extremist Muslim splinter group.

Hizb ut-Tahrir (HuT), which is legal in Britain but banned in Germany and much of the Middle East, advised Shabina Begum, a 15-year-old orphan. Her case, which was funded by legal aid, was thrown out by the High Court last week.

Mainstream Muslim leaders reacted angrily to news of extremist involvement in the case. They fear it risks stirring up the sort of controversy sparked in France when the government banned the wearing of the hijab, or headscarf, in school. Khalid Mahmood, Labour MP for Birmingham’s Perry Bar constituency, said: “Most Muslims are happy with the existing dress code. I think they (HuT) are trying to pick a fight. The Home Office needs to look at some of their activities. At the moment they are very close to the edge.”

Mahmood said HuT’s role was particularly disturbing because of Begum’s vulnerability. She was 13 when, in September 2002, she was sent home from Denbigh high school in Luton for wearing a jilbab, an ankle-length dress that leaves only the face and hands visible. Begum, who was regarded as a promising pupil, was orphaned last April with the death of her mother. Her father had died in 1992. Her 21-year-old brother, Shuweb Rahman, who helped her bring the case, is an HuT supporter. ...

Dr Imran Waheed, an HuT spokesman, confirmed that leading activists had encouraged Begum in the dispute. “Our members in Luton have consistently advised Shabina and her family to stand up for her right to an education and her right to observe the Islamic ordinances, including the wearing of the jilbab,” he said in a statement. He emphasised that the group had not contributed financially towards the legal action or to her family.

According to Dr Nazreen Nawaz, also an HuT spokesman, one of the group’s supporters, Rebekha Khan, 23, has been in contact with Begum for the past two years. This weekend, Khan played down her role: “The first time I met Shabina was at an Islamic event two years ago. It was clear to me even then that she was already very orientated to Islam.”

Mahmood, who has in the past likened HuT to the British National party, said it had a record of targeting young people in schools and universities to lure them away from the mainstream of the Muslim community in Britain. “It is important that social services look into that role,” he said.

In this country, CAIR is serving the same function as Hizb ut-Tahrir, advancing the radical agenda at every opportunity—but CAIR’s a little slicker at hiding their militancy. (Since September 11, especially.) Aggressively pushing for acceptance of repressive dress for women in every facet of Western life is very much a part of the strategy of radical Islam.

A Muslim with courage - yes, there is at least ONE

Friday, June 18, 2004

Israel - A State Of Mind.


By: Tashbih Sayyed

If one has to look for one basic, elementary cause of terrorism engulfing civilization today; it is religious absolutism. Religious absolutism results from a belief that a particular faith represents the absolute truth and therefore must be accepted by everyone else without question. Such an absolutist ideology encourages bigotry of the highest order and promotes extreme hatred of other faiths.

Since true intellectual enlightenment respects diversity and rejects bigotry, religious absolutists, as a matter of faith, tend to be anti-intellectual. That's why all absolutists are, by nature, fundamentalist and obscurantist. They preach literalist philosophies and demonstrate an intrinsic repulsion for modernity. They abhor open societies and work to destroy any system that promotes tolerance and advances the cause of democracy.

Nazism, Communism, Japanese imperialism etc. all claimed to have possessed the absolute truth and tried to impose it on others, causing a great amount of human suffering in the process. Fortunately, none of these philosophies enjoyed the backing of any church and therefore lacked religious legitimacy, making it relatively easy for the civilized world to eventually defeat them.

Radical Islam or Islamism, driven by extremist and an obscurantist interpretation of Islam, is the current face of this evil. Because it has very cleverly managed to hijack Islam, a faith of more than 1.2 billion people, its sway is absolute. Most Muslim societies have fallen under its influence and, as a consequence, have become the breeding ground of terrorism. Events of the recent past have reconfirmed, beyond any doubt, its destructive potential.

Being a totalitarian ideology, radical Islam demands absolute submission. And since it knows that enlightened and informed souls do not make obedient slaves, it is committed to keep Muslims backward and uninformed. Radical Islam, like any other totalitarian ideology that thrives on lies, manipulated Holy Scriptures, fabricated traditions of the Prophet and literalism, and cannot allow its prey to be exposed to an open intellectual environment. That's why it enforces strict censor and does not allow unconditional pursuit of knowledge. This is the only way it can keep the masses in the dark and in its control.

In an Islamist controlled society, debate is forbidden, difference of opinion and dissension is considered a perversion, and modern education a threat. Individual reasoning is forbidden. And expression of doubt about any aspect of the "religiously mandated" social, cultural and political sociology is barred as blasphemy.

Anyone attempting to challenge the status quo is instantly declared an apostate. An Islamist mind is a possessed mind - a condition that compels him or her to live to destroy others. An Islamist does not believe in living side by side with anyone who does not conform to his or her ideology. His life is a constant Jihad (holy war) to overwhelm and eradicate infidels.

Read the whole thing here:

A Muslim with courage.

Muslim mutilation - Part two...

Tuesday, June 15, 2004

Some terrorist-supporting bloggers insist (despite the evidence) that their religion does not allow the desecration of dead humans.

This issue of the Al-Qa'ida-identified journal 'Sawt Al-Jihad' included an interview with Fawwaz bin Muhammad Al-Nashami, commander of the Al-Quds Brigade that took responsibility for the May 29 attack at Khobar, Saudi Arabia, in which 22 people were killed. The following are excerpts from the interview: [1]

http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD73104



The First Attack: 'We Tied the Infidel by One Leg [Behind the Car]… Everyone Watched the Infidel Being Dragged'

Sawt Al-Jihad: "How did you begin [the operation]?"

Al-Nashami:"We left the apartment at precisely a quarter to six. We drew near the site, and we changed our clothes and belted on the ammunition pouches and weapons. We asked Allah to help us, and make things go easily for us.

"The company [compound] had two gates, and we went to the first. Our brother Nimr and the other brothers went and ordered the guard to open the gate. There was a man behind the gate and the fence. Two security personnel were outside the gate, and one was inside, and he was the one who could open [the gate]. [So] the brothers told him: 'Open the gate!' but he refused. The brothers wanted to break in, but he hid behind the counter.

"We were in a hurry, because we had to finish with this company, and go on to the other [company]. [So] we turned to the second main gate, broke through it, and finished dealing with the guards that were there.

"As soon as we entered, we encountered the car of a Briton, the investment director of the company, whom Allah had sent to his death. He is the one whose mobile phone on the seat of his car, with the blood on it, they kept showing [on television]. We left him in the street.

"We went out, and drove our car. We had tied the infidel by one leg [behind the car]. We left the company [compound] and met the patrols. The first to arrive was the jeep of a patrol, with one soldier, and we killed him. With the rest we exchanged fire, and we got through.


"The infidel's clothing was torn to shreds, and he was naked in the street. The street was full of people, as this was during work hours, and everyone watched the infidel being dragged, praise and gratitude be to Allah.

"When we arrived at one of the bridges, we encountered an ambush of jeeps of theTawaghitdogs [i.e. Saudi government troops] and the guards of the Americans, and we exchanged fire with them. [2] When we crossed the bridge, the rope [by which the Briton was tied] snapped and the body of the infidel fell in the middle of the intersection, between the four stop signs, and everyone who was stopped at the stop signs saw the infidel on the day that he fell from the top of the bridge.

"The brothers had exchanged fire with the patrols, all the while shouting, 'Allah Akbar,' and 'There is no God but Allah.'"

The Second Attack: 'We Are Mujahideen, and We Want the Americans… We Shot Him In the Head… We Slit His Throat'

"We entered and found youths from the Arabian Peninsula [i.e. Saudi Arabia] wearing the Aramco uniform. They asked, 'What is going on?' We told them, 'Calm down, don't be afraid, we don't want you. We want only the Americans.'

"The four of us entered the company together. We met the Arab clerks, and greeted them. We asked them: 'Where are the Americans?' They were all in shock, and said: 'What's going on? Who are you?' We told them, 'We are Mujahideen, and we want the Americans. We have not come to aim a weapon at the Muslims, but to purge the Arabian Peninsula, according to the will of our Prophet Muhammad, of the infidels and the polytheists who are killing our brothers in Afghanistan and Iraq. We want you to show us where they are.'

"We entered one of the companies' [offices], and found there an American infidel who looked like a director of one of the companies. I went into his office and called him. When he turned to me, I shot him in the head, and his head exploded. We entered another office and found one infidel from South Africa, and our brother Hussein slit his throat. We asked Allah to accept [these acts of devotion] from us, and from him. This was the South African infidel.

The Third Attack: 'Brother Nimr Cut Off His Head and Put It at the Gate of the Building… We Found Hindu Engineers and We Cut Their Throats Too'

"We turned to the third site, which was the most fortified center of all the compounds. Our plan was to remain in the car until we were alongside the American Hummer. When we were next to it, the brothers appeared from the windows [of the car] and began shouting 'Allah Akbar,' and shooting them. And I saw the skull of the soldier standing behind the machine gun explode before my eyes. Allah be praised. I think the driver was also killed.


"We went to one of the buildings. Brother Nimr, may Allah's mercy be upon him, shoved the door until it opened. We entered and in front of us stood many people. We asked them their religion, and for identification documents. We used this time for Da'wa [preaching Islam], and for enlightening the people about our goal. We spoke with many of them.

"At the same time, we found a Swedish infidel. Brother Nimr cut off his head, and put it at the gate [of the building] so that it would be seen by all those entering and exiting.

"We continued in the search for the infidels, and we slit the throats of those we found among them. At the same time, we heard the sound of the patrols and the gathering [of the security personnel] outside. These cowards did not dare to enter. About 45 minutes or an hour had passed since the beginning of the operation.

"We began to comb the site looking for infidels. We foundFilipino Christians. We cut their throats and dedicated them to our brothers the Mujahideen in the Philippines. [Likewise], we found Hindu engineers and we cut their throats too, Allah be praised. That same day, we purged Muhammad's land of many Christians and polytheists.

"Afterwards, we turned to the hotel. We entered and found a restaurant, where we ate breakfast and rested a while. Then we went up to the next floor, found several Hindu dogs, and cut their throats. I told the brothers to leave them on the stairs so the troops of the Taghut would see them when they burst in, and be terror-stricken. [3] But it seems I thought too well of these cowards, because they did not enter [the hotel] until after we had left.

"We utilized the time for [teaching] the Koran to the Muslims who remained. We taught them how to read [Surat] Al-Fatiha properly. They were amazed by us, [and said], 'How are you able to do this in such an inflamed atmosphere?' Thanks be to Allah for enabling us to do so."

There is more muslim arrogance that is too disgusting for words. Read the whole thing here:

http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD73104

How muslims justify mutilation

Monday, June 14, 2004

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/06/13/mutilation_of_victims_and_muslim_law/

A RECENT FATWA posted on a popular Islamic website in Saudi Arabia," reports Neil McFarquhar in The New York Times, "explains when a Muslim may mutilate the corpse of an infidel."


The ruling by Sheik Omar Abdullah Hassan al-Shehabi specifies two circumstances in which the desecration of an infidel -- a non-Muslim -- is permitted. One is retaliation "when the enemy is disfiguring Muslim corpses or when it otherwise serves the Islamic nation." The other is when mutilation will "terrorize the enemy" or "gladden the heart of a Muslim warrior."


"That a cleric can post such an argument in an open forum," commented McFarquhar, "goes a long way toward explaining how the most radical interpretations of religious texts flourish in Saudi Arabia."

But they don't flourish only in Saudi Arabia.

The popular "Ask the Scholar" feature of Islam Online (www.islamonline.net) was recently asked "how Islam views the issue of mutilating dead bodies of enemies." In a reply, Sheik Faysal Mawlawi, deputy chairman of the European Council for Fatwa and Research, began by declaring that mutilation is "not allowable" under Islam. But then came the loophole:

"It is possible to mutilate the dead only in case of retaliation. . . . If he inflicts any physical damage on anyone, he should be retaliated against in the same manner. In case of war, Muslims are allowed to take vengeance for their mutilated dead mujahids (fighters) in the same way it was done to them." This, the European sheik explained, is the teaching of the Koran (16:126), which counsels patience but authorizes revenge.


Two facts seem indisputable: (1) A Muslim intent on such mutilation can find clerical authority to justify it. And (2) a small but implacable minority of Muslims are intent on such mutilation. Indeed, it has become a signature of the evil we are fighting, as the news of the last few months has shown.

Help me, I'm a Muslim

Tuesday, June 08, 2004

As a muslim, this guy obviously knew that no one would help him if they thought he was an infidel. More proof about the caring nature of the folks belonging to the cult called the "religion of peace (barf)"...

RIYADH - Riddled with bullets, BBC correspondent Frank Gardner pleaded for his life in the Saudi capital shouting to bystanders to help a fellow Muslim, a police officer said on Monday.
"I'm a Muslim, help me, I'm a Muslim, help me," the British father of two daughters cried in Arabic, the officer said.

Gardner was stretched on the road, covered in blood from multiple bullet wounds in a slum area of southern Riyadh known as a hotbed of hardliners.

A fluent Arabic speaker with a degree in Arab and Islamic Studies, he was carrying a small copy of the Koran, the Muslim holy book, a device used by Westerner reporters to try to reassure Islamist militants.

Breeding islamic hate-mongers in America

Monday, June 07, 2004

JIHAD SUMMER CAMP

Last Friday, federal agents in the U.S. raided the northern Virginia offices of the World Association of Muslim Youth (WAMY), one of those Wahhabi charities we all know and love. The folks at the Investigative Project provided pages from a songbook from WAMY's summer camp for Muslim kids. If you expected "kumbaya", you will be sadly dissapointed:

Bring back the glory to its lions
And restore the zeal to its soldiers
Flatten evil in its cradle
And unsheath the swords
And don't be concerned here with difficulties.

Ask the kuffaar [infidels]: who repelled their tyrants?
And ask the mushrikeen [infidels]: who terrified their supporters?
...Ask the blood which reddened the face of the earth
[snip] Alas, we have forgotten our position here (now)
And we've abandoned the shariah and our role
Error has built in our territory whatever it has
And it has built nothing but weakness and ruin.
And it has built nothing but weakness and ruin.
And we nurture nothing but desires and falsehoods!


Hail! Hail! O sacrificing soldiers!
To us! To us! So we may defend the flag
On this Day of Jihad, are you miserly with your blood?!
And has life become dearer to you? And staying behind sweeter?
Is staying in this world of torment more pleasing to us?...

Sharia - the creeping scourge of islam takes root in Canada

Tuesday, June 01, 2004

Good to see that even modern muslim women, living in a civilized society, don't want to live under the barbarism of sharia. This article is from the Toronto Star, a traditional voice from the left.

Toronto Star




Alia Hogben doesn't want to be waging a public battle with her fellow Muslims. But she and other women such as her are speaking out these days because they fear Muslim women's rights will be threatened by new civil tribunals due to open soon in Ontario.

What is upsetting Hogben and many other Muslim women in the province is that the tribunals will arbitrate marriage, family and business disputes based on Sharia, a 1,300-year-old body of Islamic laws.

At times, practising Muslims admit, Sharia law has been misused to deprive women of their rights. Critics question whether the proposed tribunals will, for instance, favour men over women in pre-marital agreements or in divorce settlements.

The Arbitration Act, which governs tribunals, provides safeguards against wrongdoing. Besides decreeing that rulings must be consistent with Canadian laws, it ensures there is a right to appeal decisions to a regular court. And choosing to use a tribunal is voluntary. No one can be forced to give up their right to have a case heard in a regular court.

But again critics question whether the process will indeed be voluntary, or whether women will be pressured by their religious leaders and their communities into participating. Immigrants, who do not know the English language or their rights in Canada, would be especially vulnerable.

"Women are afraid they will not be `good' Muslims if they don't go along with (the tribunals) or that they'll be accused of blasphemy," Hogben says.

 
 
 
 
Copyright © The Flanstein